By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Where is Microsoft headed from here on out?

 

Where do you think Microsoft will focus on?

PC 62 54.87%
 
Xbox 14 12.39%
 
Equal focus on both 37 32.74%
 
Total:113
reviniente on 28 November 2017
Intrinsic said:
Azzanation said:

Unfortunately many on this site dont understand this.

The way they think is if its not number in there imaginary world than its a failed product. 

I think you really have a myopic way of looking at things. 

 

  1. this isn't 1994
  2. As with (1) the financial statement of gaming today is significant!y different than at a time when game development center around the use of sprites on a 2D plane. 
  3. the average PS1 game cost $800k to $1.8M to make. the average snes game costs even less. The average PS4/XB1 game costs over $30M-$50M. 
  4. in 1990's a game selling 1M copies was a big deal (platinum hits) today? a game selling 1M copies is a failure because it wouldn't recoup it's investment. Or at best it breaks even. 
  5. lastly, what sense does it make comparing a console in this gen to the sales another console accomplished over 20yrs ago???!!! If you are gonna compare anything, compare it in a similar timescale with the platforms it's competing with. 
The XB1 ends this gen not even matching the sales of the 360... and somehow you think that's not a failure? The PS3 finished last gen with around 80M in sales. And both I and Sony thinks it was a failure. While Sony won't. admit it, everything about the PS4 shows they set out to never make the same mistake again. 

 

How on Earth do you know this?



Around the Network
CartBlanche on 28 November 2017
SweetTalia said:
flashfire926 said:
So a system that is well on its way to outsell the snes isn't successful? Okkaayyy......

They don't need to beat PS to be successful, you know...

How dare you speak with so much sense..

The history books and internebs tend to highlight the winner of things. Eg. The winners of gold medals in athletics. The winner of the super bowl of particular years. Who was the first person on the moon (anyone remember who the 2nd person was without looking it up?). The winner of who sold the most consoles.

In 20-30 years time some individuals will fondly remember that the Xbox was 2nd or 3rd, several generations in a row. But everyone will remember who was at the top, the winner!  Few people will say "yeah but Xbox outsold the snes and still came 2nd/3rd". That's just the way history works!



Nem on 28 November 2017

Ok, so the thing with MS is:

MS's strength is in the windows platform.
The Xbox brand is incapable of finding huge sucess outside of the US.
MS has reduced their investment on first party software.
MS still has hardware selling power in the US.

Like, the problem is that one region isn't enough to make a sucessful games system.
So, what would make sense is for MS to make a cross between PC and console hardware. If they have acess to the whole PC library, they won't have software problems. Oh and drop the Xbox brand, at least outside of the US. Go with Windows box.

Of course, easier said than done.

Alternatively, i have doubt's they are getting a satisfactory ROI and should probably invest in another market instead.

 

What i think they will do os try to rush the next gen out, like they did with the 360, wich was devastating for the market, so i wish they didn't do that again.

Last edited by Nem - on 28 November 2017

JRPGfan on 28 November 2017
reviniente said:
Intrinsic said:

I think you really have a myopic way of looking at things. 

 

  1. this isn't 1994
  2. As with (1) the financial statement of gaming today is significant!y different than at a time when game development center around the use of sprites on a 2D plane. 
  3. the average PS1 game cost $800k to $1.8M to make. the average snes game costs even less. The average PS4/XB1 game costs over $30M-$50M. 
  4. in 1990's a game selling 1M copies was a big deal (platinum hits) today? a game selling 1M copies is a failure because it wouldn't recoup it's investment. Or at best it breaks even. 
  5. lastly, what sense does it make comparing a console in this gen to the sales another console accomplished over 20yrs ago???!!! If you are gonna compare anything, compare it in a similar timescale with the platforms it's competing with. 
The XB1 ends this gen not even matching the sales of the 360... and somehow you think that's not a failure? The PS3 finished last gen with around 80M in sales. And both I and Sony thinks it was a failure. While Sony won't. admit it, everything about the PS4 shows they set out to never make the same mistake again. 

 

How on Earth do you know this?

It sounds right.. though.



Imaginedvl on 28 November 2017
reviniente said:
Intrinsic said:

I think you really have a myopic way of looking at things. 

 

  1. this isn't 1994
  2. As with (1) the financial statement of gaming today is significant!y different than at a time when game development center around the use of sprites on a 2D plane. 
  3. the average PS1 game cost $800k to $1.8M to make. the average snes game costs even less. The average PS4/XB1 game costs over $30M-$50M. 
  4. in 1990's a game selling 1M copies was a big deal (platinum hits) today? a game selling 1M copies is a failure because it wouldn't recoup it's investment. Or at best it breaks even. 
  5. lastly, what sense does it make comparing a console in this gen to the sales another console accomplished over 20yrs ago???!!! If you are gonna compare anything, compare it in a similar timescale with the platforms it's competing with. 
The XB1 ends this gen not even matching the sales of the 360... and somehow you think that's not a failure? The PS3 finished last gen with around 80M in sales. And both I and Sony thinks it was a failure. While Sony won't. admit it, everything about the PS4 shows they set out to never make the same mistake again. 

 

How on Earth do you know this?

I believe he is using the same logic than people thinking the Xbox One is failure because it does not reach Play Station Four sale numbers :)
Which basically is non-sense...



Around the Network
reviniente on 28 November 2017
JRPGfan said:
reviniente said:

How on Earth do you know this?

It sounds right.. though.

Is he a SCE executive or employee? An industry insider? A corporate spy? How can he now for certain how SONY feels about the PS3? So, no. It doesn't sound right.



SuperRetroTurbo on 28 November 2017

First off Microsoft isn't going anywhere in gaming. They will be around for a while. The new dedication to a first party studio should hint to that at the very least.

Second allocate monies? C'mon it's Microsoft. I'm sur the gaming division has plenty resource and back up money from the empire.

I think people are overreacting to one generation of poor sales.

On the converse..their main faults are mostly hardware and technical issues. The latter for example the One not being able to play games without dling first is a major technical issue.

They've yet to implement VR but again are showing signs of future development.

I predicted the fall of WiiU....years before its release by subtle implications Nintendo made with focus on hardware and motion control. I wont get into it...but just like Nintendo...Microsoft will bounce back.

They're just too dedicated to future installments and peripherals.



Insert Coin. Press START. You Died. Continue?

Azzanation on 28 November 2017
DevilRising said:
flashfire926 said:
So a system that is well on its way to outsell the snes isn't successful? Okkaayyy......

They don't need to beat PS to be successful, you know...

 

 

They do when console and game production costs are much higher now than they were for a 16-bit console back in 1991.

Thats what paid services are for.



VAMatt on 28 November 2017
RJ_Sizzle said:
ThisGuyFooks said:

My question is:

If Xbox cease to exist tomorrow, what will be the legacy of Xbox? How did they contributed to the industry? In which way they pushed the industry forward?

I would say definitely Xbox Live. The first serious attempt at online gaming for consoles. Everything before was kind of an afterthought. Stuff like SegaNet didn't compare. Xbox definitely brought the PC type infrastructure to gaming, and it was better for it. We got hdds for space as opposed to memory cards, and that was definitely a great thing. Only downer is that you had to pay for the service, and the others jumped on that business model, kind of tainting it in the process.

We've had this discussion on VGChartz before.  And, yeah, the general concensus, with which I agree, is that MS brought online gaming into the mainsteam, and pushed it forward from there.  That and the harddrive. 



VAMatt on 29 November 2017

I think MS will try again to make Xbox into a home media hub. I don't know if they'll succeed - they probably won't. But, it seems like it is time to try again.

Many people have integrated smart home features into their lives. Everyone streams tv and movies. Everyone does all kinds of shopping and other stuff online. And, there's still tons of gaming. Eventually, somebody will successfully pull all of that into one device. MS has repeatedly expressed a desire to be that person. They have the pockets full of cash that it takes to keep trying. So, I think they will.